| T O P I C R E V I E W |
| Jelennet |
Posted - 05 May 2010 : 05:34:32
Another noob's question. Which class is more powerful - sorcerer or wizard? Can Simbul beat Khelben or Elminster in a duel? |
| 30 L A T E S T R E P L I E S (Newest First) |
| Eldacar |
Posted - 19 May 2011 : 03:36:47
quote:
Originally posted by Nicolai Withander
Both the sorcerer and the wizard have the power to destroy the world, but comes down to the player behind the characer.
The joke is that both can break the world in half. Wizards just have more ways of doing it than the sorcerer does.
The top classes of power in 3.5e, for reference, are the Wizard, Druid, Cleric, Archivist and Artificer. If you use the spell-to-power variant of the Erudite class, then it too is on the top of the heap. Druids are the easiest to use (but not necessarily the strongest). |
| Nicolai Withander |
Posted - 18 May 2011 : 23:24:55
Ohh... well im very inclined to say that the wizard is the most powerful class. Cleric is a good and strong class, but the most powerful... im not so sure. And to me.. the last time the druid was realy powerful, was in 2ed AD&D!
But that's a whole other story!
|
| Diffan |
Posted - 18 May 2011 : 12:48:02
quote:
Originally posted by Nicolai Withander
Ahhh... I thought you meant that it was less dificult for a sorcerer to cast devestating spells, and not the amound!
Not less difficult, but the class depends on a higher amout of spell slots to be on the same plane with the Wizard.
I agree that the wizard is in the top 3 most powerful classes of v3.5 (slightly behind the Druid, and a little past the Cleric) and the fact that they gain bonus feats every 5 levels, Scribe Scroll for free, and the advent of [Reserve] feats, makes them better than Sorcerers for staying power and versatility.
|
| Nicolai Withander |
Posted - 18 May 2011 : 12:38:02
Basicly I believe that like in many other games and real life situation it comes down to the player. If your a longtime player of a wizard who have focused your whole life around the endless battles of evil (like me), you can in many cases have the upper hand in a lot of fights, and vise verca...
It simple comes down to how good you are at playing your class.
Both the sorcerer and the wizard have the power to destroy the world, but comes down to the player behind the characer.
Personally, as I've stated more than once, I feel a wizard in most cases could have the upper hand. Hence the unlimited amound of spells... but still it comes down to the player and also the situation!
|
| Banter Darkdirk |
Posted - 17 May 2011 : 14:18:19
While a sorcerer can cast a vast amount of spells, their slower progression and fewer known spells makes them vulnerable to their own selections.
A wizard can use metamagic feats (without taking special feats to do so) and has bonus class feats and basically an unlimited selection of spells (as long as they are learning as many spells as possible), but they have to be prepared for a/the fight.
I think a thing to consider as well is magic items. The bonus class feats of a wizard may allow them the opportunity to create more magic items that can replace the need to prepare every spell (or save them when they forgot to cast a certain spell).
That's not to say that a sorcerer couldn't craft similiar items...but the items would essentially be/have abilities already matching their smaller pool of known spells.
In the end, the actual player is what really matters (and some nice dice rolling). I've seen smart players get out of serious jams just by using their brain and not their spells.
|
| Eldacar |
Posted - 17 May 2011 : 10:00:42
quote:
Originally posted by Diffan
Because a Wizard is limited to a maximum of 4 slots a level per day (not including bonus spells from a high Intelligence modifier) where as a Sorcerer has 6 slots a level per day (again, not including bonus spells from a high Charisma modifier). A Sorcerer may not have the versatility of the wizard, but they have more castings and thus (on average) can out-damage a wizard based purely on the numbers. That is, if the wizard and sorcerer uses up all their slots for damage dealing/blasting magic.
Damage (i.e. the "blaster") is actually one of the less effective ways of playing a wizard. Controlling the battlefield with "save-or-die" (or "no-save-just-die" in some cases) is what they do best. Walls of force, cloudkills, glitterdust, sleep, that sort of thing. You can still do a respectable amount of direct damage with a "mailman" though (mailman = delivers the package). I think it's about 900-1000 HP worth of damage per spell when you optimise it enough. Single target, though, not area effects. Sorcerers can do the same, of course, but wizards pre-prep their spells while Sorcs have to use it as a full-round action, so it'll take longer for them to get the damage going. And Sorcs don't get the bonus feats that can be spent on metamagic, either.
As to spell slots, be a Specialist wizard (Conjuration is the best school, for reference - the first ones to be dropped are Evocation followed by Enchantment) coupled with Focused Specialist, and you have the same number of spell slots as a sorcerer.
In 3rd and 3.5e, wizards rule, unfortunately. They take a bit more thought and care than a druid does, but if played "properly" they can be a party in their own right. Most of the balancing that Wizards did with them revolves around wizards supposedly being blasters, but canny players quickly picked up on the fact that they were absurdly powerful when played as almost the exact opposite of that. Eventually, I think they just gave up trying.
The background itself might depict most people as roughly equal (until you get to absurd levels of power, anyway), but it isn't reflected in the mechanics.
As to the original question of Khelben, Elminster and the Simbul (which I almost completely forgot about until now), those three have builds that are terribly poor. Only the Simbul even has Epic Spellcasting (which is a game-breaker in its own right, and something that any 21st level wizard should have without fail), but she doesn't even have a particularly good build (Szass Tam, for example, will stomp all over her in a straight fight if played by the rules and skilled players). Elminster is even worse off, since he only becomes remotely usable as an adversary for somebody approaching his level (if you roll that way, of course - I generally don't) if you significantly alter his build. I prefer something (assuming the 35-level build of 3rd edition onwards) along the lines of:
Fighter 1 / Rogue 2 / Cleric 3 / Wizard 4 / Mystic Theurge 12 / Archmage 5 / Arcane Lord 8
And, of course, the +4 CR that comes with the Chosen of Mystra template (which isn't actually all that good at epic levels - you could probably limit it to +2 or +3 CR without much trouble). The end result comes out at 15th level Cleric casting, 29th level Wizard casting (using one of his feat slots on Practised Spellcaster: Wizard bumps that up to caster level 33, plus Spell Power for CL 34 if you pick that particular High Arcana, and any wizard worth his salt carries around at least one Ring of Arcane Might or Orange Ioun Stone for another +1 CL for a CL 35 total). Not only does it avoid some of the "dead levels" that Cleric would otherwise be providing, the cleric list itself is quite useful for self-buffing without impinging on his ability to memorise enough arcane magic to break Faerun in half. Giving him Epic Spellcasting as well helps power him up further, provided that rules for it aren't abused relentlessly (which it's hard not to do - to make them playable, you have to abuse the additional casters part, but doing that is a slippery slope, especially when it's not really all that hard to get a +240 Spellcraft modifier or so by 20th level).
Anyway, that adjusted Elminster build makes him more potent, and brings him close to Telamont Tanthul (who, with his "Wizard 20 / Shadow Adept 10 / Netherese Arcanist 5" build is one of the strongest casters in the game unless you go out of your way to make it worthless) in power. Which is where I think he should be, personally. Having lots of epic (and non epic) friends also helps. |
| Nicolai Withander |
Posted - 17 May 2011 : 08:55:33
Ahhh... I thought you meant that it was less dificult for a sorcerer to cast devestating spells, and not the amound! |
| Diffan |
Posted - 17 May 2011 : 04:53:32
quote:
Originally posted by Nicolai Withander
quote:
Originally posted by Diffan
In addition, sorcerers can easily fire off more destructive magic than a wizard can.
How or why do you feel this???
I have no problem leveling Toril with my wizard... why should this be easyer for a sorcerer?
Because a Wizard is limited to a maximum of 4 slots a level per day (not including bonus spells from a high Intelligence modifier) where as a Sorcerer has 6 slots a level per day (again, not including bonus spells from a high Charisma modifier). A Sorcerer may not have the versatility of the wizard, but they have more castings and thus (on average) can out-damage a wizard based purely on the numbers. That is, if the wizard and sorcerer uses up all their slots for damage dealing/blasting magic.
|
| Eldacar |
Posted - 17 May 2011 : 02:53:01
quote:
Originally posted by Diffan
I wasn't aware that the Rainbow Servant gave access to all cleric spells.
It's the 10th level capstone ability of the class. For most classes, it's not really bad or good, since you still have to actually learn the spells (a sorcerer, for example, is still limited by the amount of spells he knows, which those cleric spells will have to take up slots for). The only problem is when you have a class like Warmage or Beguiler, because they know every spell on their spell list and Rainbow Servant adds the spells explicitly to the list.
I'm not fond of Warmage, though. Blaster wizards don't appeal to me, which is why I go for Beguiler instead. |
| Nicolai Withander |
Posted - 17 May 2011 : 00:07:59
quote:
Originally posted by Diffan
In addition, sorcerers can easily fire off more destructive magic than a wizard can.
How or why do you feel this???
I have no problem leveling Toril with my wizard... why should this be easyer for a sorcerer? |
| Diffan |
Posted - 15 May 2011 : 14:30:55
quote:
Originally posted by Eldacar
The easy way around spell selection problems is to start in the Beguiler class (spontaneous caster), and then Prestige into Rainbow Servant after 3rd level. Beguilers have a limited selection of spells known (though they're not bad spells known), but once they hit the capstone of Rainbow Servant, they add every Cleric spell in the game to their spell list.
The benefit, of course, is that a Beguiler automatically knows all the spells on their spell list. A list to which you have just added every single Cleric spell. So now you have a spellcaster who can cast every single cleric spell ever, whenever he feels like it. And, as a result of gaining domain spells (which are also Cleric spells), a lot of the Wizard spell list as well.
I wasn't aware that the Rainbow Servant gave access to all cleric spells. If there were true, that still wouldn't automatically gain you access to all Domain spells because those aren't leveled AS cleric spells unless noted in their spell description of Level: etc..
But I get what your saying. I ususally go for the Warmage myself and shore up the Offensive selection first. |
| Eldacar |
Posted - 15 May 2011 : 12:57:11
quote:
Originally posted by Diffan
If the spell selection is rather well chosen (an array of combative, defensive, utility spells) then I think they'd take a wizard who's just as versatile.
The easy way around spell selection problems is to start in the Beguiler class (spontaneous caster), and then Prestige into Rainbow Servant after 3rd level. Beguilers have a limited selection of spells known (though they're not bad spells known), but once they hit the capstone of Rainbow Servant, they add every Cleric spell in the game to their spell list.
The benefit, of course, is that a Beguiler automatically knows all the spells on their spell list. A list to which you have just added every single Cleric spell. So now you have a spellcaster who can cast every single cleric spell ever, whenever he feels like it. And, as a result of gaining domain spells (which are also Cleric spells), a lot of the Wizard spell list as well. |
| Xar Zarath |
Posted - 13 May 2011 : 14:03:46
Therefore whoever can pop the first balor/solar wins |
| Diffan |
Posted - 13 May 2011 : 12:51:52
I've been following the debate and before Complete Mage was released, I would've handed any given battle more so to the Sorcerer. If the spell selection is rather well chosen (an array of combative, defensive, utility spells) then I think they'd take a wizard who's just as versatile. One thing that stands out are summoning spells. Most wizard might prepare one or two of these, at varying levels, but no sorcerer is going to have (or should have) a summoning spell less than their level -1 as a Known Spell. Multiple summoned monsters REALLY help with battle and make great meat-shields. In addition, sorcerers can easily fire off more destructive magic than a wizard can. Add in specific feats that allow a sorcerer to change the damage type and you can get past a lot of resistances.
This was my view until Complete Mage came out with [Reserve] feats, basically putting the wizard almost on-par with Sorcerers with even more versatility. The greatest thing about Reserved feats are that they benefit a wizard who keeps his spells prepared AND the fact that the effects are Supernatural (thus not subject to Anti-magic effects, wild magic, shadow magic, and dead magic zones). And they're at-will, so a wizard who has Chain Lightning prepared for his 6th level slot and takes the feat Storm Bolt can fire off 6d6 lighting blasts all day long with the DC = the Chain Lightning's DC - spell focus or effects related to school. So with these in play, I'd be hard pressed not to choose the wizard with a few of these feats and a good/optimized selection of spell. |
| _Jarlaxle_ |
Posted - 13 May 2011 : 11:00:39
quote:
Originally posted by Dracons
He dreams of being the most powerful arcane casting gnome in existance.
And will end up as one of the weakest, what a tragedy 
@Xar Zarath
AFAIK with the right build up wizards can cast as much or more spells per day than sorcerers. |
| Dracons |
Posted - 13 May 2011 : 10:53:32
See, I just started a new Forgotten Realms game as a player for once!
Started at 8th level. I'm an gnome 2nd Sorcerer/3rd level Wizard/3rd level Ultimate Magus.
I'm both of them. Variados. He dreams of being the most powerful arcane casting gnome in existance.
Only been second game as it, but so far lots of fun, and haven't run out of spells. Mostly attack type and some ulity for my sorcerer levels, and various types for my wizard spells.
|
| Xar Zarath |
Posted - 13 May 2011 : 06:03:55
Its more along the lines of survivability, in a long run sorcerers can cast spells more times so that gives them a good advantage, however if its not just a combat situation and the sorcerer only has battle spells line up, well then he's toast.
A wizard is stronger in my opinion because he can pop a spell necessary to the situation and maintain a sort of consistency, with needed spells to every situation, also considering in the fact that in a long run campaign, a wizard who did not choose a certain spell, but another in favor of the party can take it again whenever he chooses. In the long run Wizards FTW!
And for those who want to rant more, check out DND Wizards VS harry potter Wizards |
| Zanan |
Posted - 06 Jun 2010 : 09:45:34
quote:
Originally posted by Jelennet
Another noob's question. Which class is more powerful - sorcerer or wizard? Can Simbul beat Khelben or Elminster in a duel?
All three mentioned are iconic characters of the FR world. If you take their stats and pitch them against one another, about 899 variables come into play. The point is ... if WotC decides to do one of them, that chap or lass will lose, no matter how big or small a spellcaster they are. If need be, they bend the rules. Did it before, will do it again. |
| The Simbul |
Posted - 06 Jun 2010 : 07:52:46
quote:
Originally posted by Ashe Ravenheart
quote:
Originally posted by The Simbul<snip>
While I rarely every play 3E anymore I certainly never forgot this fact.
The problem is that this assumes you will have the luxury of 15 minutes to study your spellbook in relative peace. In addition, each spell slot you leave open is one less spell you can use in the heat of battle, and wizards already have the fewest spells per day of the pure caster classes..<snip>
Yes, it's not really smart to use this all the time, but it is pretty darn useful when you're heading into an unknown dungeon (where grabbing a fifteen minute break in a single room can be easier).
I suppose it depends on how much confidence you have in the rest of the party to secure the room while you study...wandering monsters, hidden doors, lurking hidden enemies would give me pause..especially if the dungeon is unknown as you note. Personally I would rather use the 15 minutes to seek an alternate path, or just teleport back to the city and purchase a scroll of the needed spell--if in fact it was the "only way" to get past a given obstacle, encounter, trap, etc (such is rarely ever the case, unless the DM is trying to railroad the party). |
| Sill Alias |
Posted - 08 May 2010 : 03:11:30
Yes, you CAN deplete all your forces on the target, but then... he becomes just a sitting duck, if he is not multiclassed. One good focused finger of death can give more economy of time and power. |
| Ashe Ravenheart |
Posted - 07 May 2010 : 04:23:17
quote:
Originally posted by The Simbul<snip>
While I rarely every play 3E anymore I certainly never forgot this fact.
The problem is that this assumes you will have the luxury of 15 minutes to study your spellbook in relative peace. In addition, each spell slot you leave open is one less spell you can use in the heat of battle, and wizards already have the fewest spells per day of the pure caster classes..<snip>
Yes, it's not really smart to use this all the time, but it is pretty darn useful when you're heading into an unknown dungeon (where grabbing a fifteen minute break in a single room can be easier). |
| The Simbul |
Posted - 07 May 2010 : 03:21:51
quote:
Originally posted by Jelennet
Another noob's question. Which class is more powerful - sorcerer or wizard? Can Simbul beat Khelben or Elminster in a duel?
Neither class is more powerful. They are however suited to different approaches to adventuring.
The Simbul is more powerful than Khelben, and is more powerful than Elminster with regard to the arcane, but overall he is a higher level character with regard to his experience in other classes. However it can be argued that the Simbul's supernatural abilities (shapechange, protection from spells, transform into chain lightning, etc) more than compensate for the benefits Elminster receives from his levels as a fighter, rogue, and cleric.
However using the Simbul and Elminster as an example of which of these classes is more powerful is not an effective comparison. Specifically because Elminster has 5 levels in archmage, 3 in cleric, 2 in rogue and 1 in fighter. Meanwhile the Simbul has 10 levels in wizard, and 2 levels in archmage. Add that to their above-average secondary ability scores, their Chosen templates, additional powers, and non-magical feat selections (Leadership, Epic Reputation, Blooded, Combat Expertise, etc) and you further dilute the core classes in the portrait mixture of these character's statistics. You would be better off finding stats for Hennet and Mialee and using those to contrast the 3E versions of these classes.
None of these characters you mentioned would be likely to seek battle with each other, given that they all serve(d) the same goddess and overall goals. As for an account of the rare circumstances that resulted in a clash in the past, we do have a flashback in Elminster in Hell:
SPOILER
Elminster confronted the Simbul in the Year of Burning Steel (1246 DR) when he first learned of her through rumors as an unknown mage-slayer in the East who had taken up a role in the royal court of Aglarond. After "preparing for the worst spell battle of his life" (as phrased by the Srinshee in her advice to him) he ambushed the Simbul after she slew Thayan assassins posing as emissaries in Velprintalar, accusing her of recklessly murdering mages. They battled for several pages, but eventually Elminster gained the upper hand merely by virtue of his non-magical talents, specifically his somewhat superior skill with a dagger, but ended his assault when he realized the Simbul was bleeding silver fire--thus realizing that, like he, she also was a Chosen of Mystra.
Despite the fact that she was ambushed, unprepared, and that more than a century took place between the time of that battle and the first "present day" in realms calendar when released--the Simbul still managed to hold her own, and lost when she assumed her opponent would be more vulnerable in an spell-negating prison than she would be.
quote:
Originally posted by Sill Alias
That is complicated question. Wizards need to anticipate the tactics of the sorcerer and ready the needed spells, while sorcerers just need to act on the grounds. Wizards have advantage, knowing the methods to prevent spellcaster from unleashing his magic. But sorcerers act faster.
There are many methods to prevent a spellcaster from unleashing magic, and they do not all require an abnormal or esoteric selection of spells nor would they be necessarily unknown to a sorcerer.
Readying an action to hit them with a lightning bolt as soon as they try to concentrate on casting a spell is all you really need.
quote:
Originally posted by Sill Alias
Well, the second question is not so interesting. If to consider the ending of Edwin in BG2:ToB canon with all his characteristics to the end of the game, then she has no chance against the Elminster.
Edwin had 2E AD&D game statistics, and the Simbul was more powerful than Elminster in 2E (and far more practiced at slaying Red Wizards).
quote:
Originally posted by Nicolai Withander
As a lvl 24 wiz. I have taken many a sorc down. They are not diciplined, they have no knowledge of the art and tto me they seen like children in need of a good spancking!
No to be honest, if a wizard is doing his job, he will have a spell for every situation.
By contrast, if a sorcerer is doing her job she will have a spell known to cover a myriad of situations as well. You do not need a set of highly specific, limited use spells to succeed in D&D.
The tactical advantages that wizard can gain by having darkvision, disguise self, water breathing, fly, and spider climb in his spellbook can just as easily be accomplished by sorcerer who merely has alter self in her spell repertoire.
While a well planned wizard can potentially prepare spells for every situation a well planned sorcerer can be just as versatile in the moment with a well rounded, prudent, and versatile spell selection.
If the DM truly chooses to have some rarely selected, limited use spell be the ONE AND ONLY way to finish a quest, then in the time it takes the wizard to purchase, scribe, learn, and prepare the spell a sorcerer can just as easily teleport to the nearest metropolis and go buy a scroll.
quote:
Originally posted by Dalor Darden
I have to agree with Ashe to a degree.
Sorcerers with levels in a class that gives sneak attack can be MONSTERS. Even something as simple as a Ray of Frost can become a killer.
Over all, however, Wizards should have the ability to at least survive any encounter at higher levels...and then re-equip their abilities to deal with individual threats.
Even without a prestige class a sorcerer is the wizards equal. The bonus feats a wizard receives serve to patch up their weaknesses--Spell Mastery serves to insure against spellbook loss, and bonus Item Creation compensates for low spell capacity and no spontaneous spellcasting at all (unlike clerics, druids, etc).
Regarding the escape and regroup option--the problem is that sometimes this is not an option at all. If Szass Tam is going to perform the Rite of Unmaking today then chances are you wont have 24 extra hours to go fine tune your spell selection.
quote:
Originally posted by Ashe Ravenheart
*ahem*
Before the arguments really start. May I point out one little fact about wizards that (almost) every 3E gamer I know has forgotten?
quote:
http://www.d20srd.org/srd/magicOverview/arcaneSpells.htm#wizardSpellSelectionandPreparation
When preparing spells for the day, a wizard can leave some of these spell slots open. Later during that day, she can repeat the preparation process as often as she likes, time and circumstances permitting. During these extra sessions of preparation, the wizard can fill these unused spell slots. She cannot, however, abandon a previously prepared spell to replace it with another one or fill a slot that is empty because she has cast a spell in the meantime. That sort of preparation requires a mind fresh from rest. Like the first session of the day, this preparation takes at least 15 minutes, and it takes longer if the wizard prepares more than one-quarter of her spells.
So, as long as the wizard chooses to leave a few slots open, they only need 15 minutes later on to get "the right spell".
While I rarely every play 3E anymore I certainly never forgot this fact.
The problem is that this assumes you will have the luxury of 15 minutes to study your spellbook in relative peace. In addition, each spell slot you leave open is one less spell you can use in the heat of battle, and wizards already have the fewest spells per day of the pure caster classes..
quote:
Originally posted by Nicolai Withander
I will turn you attention to the fact that my wiz never have lost a fight with a sorcere. They just keep hurling the same spells again and again! Never have I lost a fight agains a wizard... But yes I prefer the strait up fight!!!
The typical result of casting the same spell over and over again is that eventually the enemy drops to 0hp, or fails a saving throw against a devastating status effect. It does not matter what attack spell you actually use as long as it achieves one or the other. |
| Ashe Ravenheart |
Posted - 07 May 2010 : 02:45:54
quote:
Originally posted by Wooly Rupert
quote:
Originally posted by Nicolai Withander
I will turn you attention to the fact that my wiz never have lost a fight with a sorcere. They just keep hurling the same spells again and again! Never have I lost a fight agains a wizard... But yes I prefer the strait up fight!!!
This means nothing. Most NPCs or monsters can be a lot deadlier than people would expect, if only the DM running them used them to their full potential. Many DMs never learn this lesson.
What's really fun is having a sorcerer that knows Dispel Magic and Improved Counterspell feat. |
| Ashe Ravenheart |
Posted - 07 May 2010 : 02:43:39
quote:
Originally posted by Wooly Rupert
quote:
Originally posted by Ashe Ravenheart
*ahem*
Before the arguments really start. May I point out one little fact about wizards that (almost) every 3E gamer I know has forgotten?
quote:
http://www.d20srd.org/srd/magicOverview/arcaneSpells.htm#wizardSpellSelectionandPreparation
When preparing spells for the day, a wizard can leave some of these spell slots open. Later during that day, she can repeat the preparation process as often as she likes, time and circumstances permitting. During these extra sessions of preparation, the wizard can fill these unused spell slots. She cannot, however, abandon a previously prepared spell to replace it with another one or fill a slot that is empty because she has cast a spell in the meantime. That sort of preparation requires a mind fresh from rest. Like the first session of the day, this preparation takes at least 15 minutes, and it takes longer if the wizard prepares more than one-quarter of her spells.
So, as long as the wizard chooses to leave a few slots open, they only need 15 minutes later on to get "the right spell".
That's not the same as selecting spells on the fly, and it still doesn't cover the possibility of having memorized utility spells.
I agree. Sorcerers are terrific in that regard (which is why they are so good for multiclassing with rogues and such). |
| Wooly Rupert |
Posted - 07 May 2010 : 00:47:52
quote:
Originally posted by Nicolai Withander
I will turn you attention to the fact that my wiz never have lost a fight with a sorcere. They just keep hurling the same spells again and again! Never have I lost a fight agains a wizard... But yes I prefer the strait up fight!!!
This means nothing. Most NPCs or monsters can be a lot deadlier than people would expect, if only the DM running them used them to their full potential. Many DMs never learn this lesson. |
| Wooly Rupert |
Posted - 07 May 2010 : 00:45:34
quote:
Originally posted by Nicolai Withander
Well what wizard wil only memorize utility spells??? A propper dush bag!
Now... my statement that sorceres' dont have the same respect of the art as wizards might not be completely want I mean to say! There just this aura this rogueish feeling about them. Undiciplined in some way. And powerful in combat... hmm... most of the time a skilled well trained wizard will know what he's doing so that he will never be cought totally off guard.
Yeah, because it's totally unreasonable for a wizard to assume he's not going to be getting into combat. I know that my wizard, spending a week doing research in Candlekeep, still makes sure he's got plenty of fireballs and lightning bolts memorized! 
There is more to D&D than combat. |
| Wooly Rupert |
Posted - 07 May 2010 : 00:43:32
quote:
Originally posted by Ashe Ravenheart
*ahem*
Before the arguments really start. May I point out one little fact about wizards that (almost) every 3E gamer I know has forgotten?
quote:
http://www.d20srd.org/srd/magicOverview/arcaneSpells.htm#wizardSpellSelectionandPreparation
When preparing spells for the day, a wizard can leave some of these spell slots open. Later during that day, she can repeat the preparation process as often as she likes, time and circumstances permitting. During these extra sessions of preparation, the wizard can fill these unused spell slots. She cannot, however, abandon a previously prepared spell to replace it with another one or fill a slot that is empty because she has cast a spell in the meantime. That sort of preparation requires a mind fresh from rest. Like the first session of the day, this preparation takes at least 15 minutes, and it takes longer if the wizard prepares more than one-quarter of her spells.
So, as long as the wizard chooses to leave a few slots open, they only need 15 minutes later on to get "the right spell".
That's not the same as selecting spells on the fly, and it still doesn't cover the possibility of having memorized utility spells. |
| Alisttair |
Posted - 06 May 2010 : 14:54:22
Thanks for reminding us Ashe. That is something I NEVER remembered while playing a wizard in 3E and regret not taking it into consideration. Could have been much valuable in a few circumstances. |
| Darkmeer |
Posted - 06 May 2010 : 14:53:43
quote:
Originally posted by Wooly Rupert
quote:
Originally posted by Nicolai Withander
Caster level + feats + d20
Thats how you penetrate that.
I gotta say that even thou a wizard could win in some situations and a sorcere in others, the charactaristic of a wizard is just so much deep. I find that sorceres' has less respect for "the art" I dont know but theres just something about them.
But I still feel that a wizard will have the advantage in every fight. Unless ofc he has no memorized spell at all!
How do you figure sorcerers don't respect the Art? Are you saying something can't be respected if it's felt instead of studied?
A wizard who memorizes only utility spells is going to be useless in combat. A sorcerer will never be in that position. Nor will a sorcerer ever be in the position of having tossed all his offensive spells and having only non-combat spells left.
The respect of the art? What, has Candlekeep moved to Thay now? Wasn't Thay in 3.5 very unwelcoming to Sorcerers and their ilk (Favored souls, etc)? Given this thought, Nicolai, are you from Thay? 
On a more serious note, neither class is more powerful, in my not-so-humble opinion. They are powerful in different ways, but neither should outstrip the other, as far as overall power level goes. The only thing that differentiates them, is that the Wizard requires more planning, while the sorcerer sometimes has to be very creative with what it knows.
/d |
| Nicolai Withander |
Posted - 06 May 2010 : 14:22:58
he he... might be true! But my feeling is that a well played wizard is more powerful than a well played sorcere!!! |
|
|
